ABSTRACT
The present study evaluated the influence of different composite bases and surface treatments on marginal and internal adaptation of class II indirect composite restorations, after simulated occlusal loading. Thirty-two class II inlay cavities were prepared on human third molars, with margins located in cementum. A 1-mm composite base extending up to the cervical margins was applied on all dentin surfaces in the experimental groups; impressions were made and composite inlays fabricated. The following experimental conditions were tested: no liner (control group), flowable composite treated with soft air abrasion (experiment 1), flowable composite sandblasted (experiment 2) and restorative composite sandblasted (experiment 3). All specimens were submitted to 1,000,000 cycles with a 100-N eccentric load. Tooth– restoration margins were analysed semi-quantitatively by scanning electron microscopy before and after loading; internal adaptation was also evaluated after test completion. The percentage of perfect adaptation in enamel was 79.5% to 92.7% before loading and 73.3% to 81.9% after loading. Perfect adaptation to dentin was reduced before loading (54.8% to 77.6%) and after loading (41.9% to 63%), but no difference was found among groups for pre- and post-loading conditions. No debonding occurred between the base and composite luting. A significant, negative influence of cyclic loading was observed. The results of the present study support the use of flowable or restorative composites as base/liner underneath large class II restorations. Soft air abrasion represents a potential alternative to airborne particle abrasion for treating cavities before cementation. The application of a composite base underneath indirect composite restorations represents a feasible non-invasive alternative to surgical crown lengthening to relocate cavity margins from an intra-crevicular to supra-gingival position.
Keywords Indirect, Inlays, Onlays, Composite, Class II, Bases, Interface treatments, Marginal adaptation, Fatigue